Taken from the Iowa Department of Transportation
Concern / Issue and Possible responses
1) Liability risks involved in constructing or designating bicycle facilities are too great.
In most states, recreational use statutes protect adjacent property owners along trails.
————————————————————————
Ninety-two percent of rail-trails are owned and managed by a public agency. In every case, the liability risks associated with the trail are folded into the public agency’s umbrella insurance policy.
————————————————————————
Public agencies can reduce their potential exposure to legal action by incorporating the following activities: use accepted facility planning and design guidelines (AASHTO or FHWA); apply common maintenance standards to public facilities; monitor the use of facilities and be aware of any developing problems; and post warnings to users regarding actual or potential hazards.
2) Multi-use trails are mainly for recreation and don’t serve a transportation purpose.
Rail-trails in many states are used for transportation purposes. On trails in Seattle, Washington; North Virginia; and Clearwater, Florida; 39 percent of the weekday use is for commuting purposes.
————————————————————————
All automobile trips are not solely for transportation purposes, up to one-quarter of all automobile trips are for social and recreational reasons.
3) Our community cannot afford bicycling and walking facilities.
Most communities can afford the federal government’s required match of 20 percent of the project cost. On average, communities contribute 27 percent of a project’s total cost.
————————————————————————
Trails can generate additional revenue for public agencies.
————————————————————————
Local businesses of all kinds, from antique shops and bed & breakfast establishments to hardware and even clothing stores, frequently see an increase in sales when a trail opens on a previously unused railroad corridor. New businesses such as snack bars and bicycle shops often open to accommodate trail users.
————————————————————————
Approximately 5 to 22 cents is saved (through reduced pollution, damage to the environment, etc.) for every automobile mile displaced by walking and bicycling.
4) People are afraid to use bicycle and pedestrian pathways.
Statistics indicate that crime on trails occurs no more frequently than in any other public place.
————————————————————————
Safety on trails can be increased through design practices. Lighting, elimination of dead ends, aesthetics and paying close attention to the design of tunnels and underpasses can reduce safety concerns.
————————————————————————
Providing active management of the facility, including garbage pickup, mowing, etc., indicates to users and potential abusers that a local agency is monitoring the trail.
————————————————————————
Management practices such as regular observation of trails by volunteer trail patrols or police officers, placement of emergency phones, and vegetation maintenance can also increase safety.
5) Trail use results in trespassing problems and less privacy for adjacent landowners.
Planting vegetation screens or constructing fences can be included in trail designs along the properties of concerned landowners.
————————————————————————
Where trails pass through or are adjacent to private property, trail signage can include reminders that trail users are to remain in the trail corridor and that private property abuts the trail.
6) Trail users do not pay their fair share of trail costs.
Bicyclists and pedestrians are also motorists who pay gas taxes. Off-highway vehicle (OHV) users also pay gas taxes and registration fees.
————————————————————————
Many cycling and pedestrian improvements are made on road rights-of-way and can improve conditions for drivers. Added shoulder provisions for bikes also improve roadway safety for vehicles. Additionally, removing pedestrians and bicyclists from the roadway decreases the operational concerns for motorists.
————————————————————————
Some trail users pay fees that go directly to trail development and maintenance (OHV registration fees, trail passes, etc.).
7) Trails do not provide benefits for those that do not use them.
Local businesses of all kinds, from antique shops and bed & breakfast establishments to hardware and even clothing stores, frequently see an increase in sales when a trail opens on a previously unused railroad corridor. New businesses such as snack bars and bicycle shops often open to accommodate trail users.
————————————————————————
Trails near residential areas actually increase neighboring property values. There is no indication that trails cause property values to decrease. The 2000 Omaha Recreational Trails Study, the 1992 National Park Service Study, the Burke-Gilman Study and the Colorado State Parks Survey all found that property values either increased or remained constant. Real estate agents list proximity to the trail in advertisements and homeowners report that the presence of the trail would make their home easier to sell.
————————————————————————
Approximately 5 to 22 cents is saved (through reduced pollution, damage to the environment, etc.) for every automobile mile displaced by walking and bicycling.
————————————————————————
Trails near residential areas actually increase neighboring property values, potentially increasing community tax revenues.
————————————————————————
Important wildlife habitats are protected along rail-trails. Dense vegetation gives cover to a variety of species. Rail-trails that parallel rivers and streams provide vital buffer zones for birds, turtles, fish and plant life.
————————————————————————
Railroad corridors have significant value as part of American culture and history. Rail-trails preserve historic railroad depots, bridges, markers, sites and routes. Historic interpretation is widely used on rail-trails to keep history alive for generations to come.
8) Trails encourage littering, crime and vandalism and have negative impacts on adjacent property owners.
Numerous studies have documented that trails do not contribute to an increase in crime and vandalism.
————————————————————————
Trails are generally safer and cleaner than unused abandoned rail corridors.
————————————————————————
Trails near residential areas actually increase neighboring property values. There is no indication that trails cause property values to decrease. The 2000 Omaha Recreational Trails Study, the 1992 National Park Service Study, the Burke-Gilman Study and the Colorado State Parks Survey all found that property values either increased or remained constant. Real estate agents list proximity to the trail in advertisements and homeowners report that the presence of the trail would make their home easier to sell.
————————————————————————
Get information on successful trails and projects out to the public before there is hard-core resistance. Bring in individuals or organizations from other communities that were originally opposed to trails developed in their area but are now in favor of trails because of the positive experience with a trail in their community.
————————————————————————
Trail corridors can be visually appealing to adjacent landowners. Landscaping or amenities such as split-rail fencing not only make a corridor attractive, but they provide a buffer between the trail corridor and adjacent property.
9) Use of abandoned rail corridors for trails in agricultural areas prevents reversion of land to farmers, possibly decreasing access between fields.
Work with adjacent farmers to identify needed access points and incorporate field access provisions (including privacy gate, if needed) into trail design.
10) We do not want a trail adjacent to our property.
Surveys of adjacent landowners prior to and following construction of trails indicate that most landowners who were originally opposed to trail construction eventually accepted or became proponents of the trail corridor.
————————————————————————
Early notification of proposed trails and education of landowners regarding the above issues can minimize the number of opponents. (Note: 1999 Iowa legislation requires prior notification of all landowners adjacent to proposed trail corridors.)
The above concerns and recommendations come from a variety of sources, which can be consulted for more detailed information on how to deal with specific issues. Resources include the following:
Doherty, Susan. “Rail-Trails and Community Sentiment – A Study of Opposition to Rail-Trails & Strategies for Success.” Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. January, 1998.
Eppley Institute for Parks and Public Lands. “Stearns County Parks Department Lake Wobegon Regional Trail Survey of Adjacent Property Owners.” 1999.
Greer, Donald. “Omaha Recreational Trails: Their Use and Effect on Property Values and Public Safety.” University of Nebraska at Omaha. June, 2000. Available on-line at www.unomaha.edu/~greer/trails.
Moore, Roger. Et al. “The Impacts of Rail-Trails: A Study of the Users and Property Owners from Three Trails.” National Park Service. 1991.
National Bicycle and Pedestrian Clearinghouse. “Overcoming Opposition to Bicycling, Walking and Trail Development.” Technical Assistance Series No. 7. March, 1996.
Robertson, Robert. “The Raccoon River Valley Trail User Study: Summary and Recommendations.” Recreation Management Program at Iowa State University and Dallas County Conservation. April, 1992.
Tracy, Tammy and Hugh Morris. “Rail-Trails and Safe Communities – The Experience on 372 Trails.” Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. January, 1998.
Trails Advocate, The Iowa Trails Magazine. “Foes Turned Friends.” Reprinted from Rails-to-Trails Conservancy publication in the Spring of 2000. Volume 16, No.1. February, 2000.
©2000 Iowa Department of Transportation